Member Info for Blubay

For someone with 20 years experience in the EARS he makes some very dodgy claims, which verge on misleading the market

“ Remarkably, in Uganda and Kenya, the EARS has a 80% success rate from nearly 40 exploration wells, including a 100% success rate in Basin Margin Fault Closures for oil and gas wells (14 from 14) since first oil in 2006.”

I mean, really how does this increase his chances of tapping a commercial helium find, for which there is a 0% success rate in EARS …so far.

I also enjoyed his “100% success rate” claim for these kind of geological plays in East Africa 🤣🤣🤣

It’s a good sign that work is still going strong during the pause in drilling, and that there’s confidence in getting the rig over there soon. I’d be interested to know if they think they can get away with moving that carrier and crane on their access roads without having to break them down again to the TZ highway weight limits. That would save some days if it’s permissible (and safe).

Mechanical and geological problems are just a normal part of the risk/hazard of drilling, maybe a one in four or five chance of going to plan. The risk is high the reward is great. You wouldn’t bet your pension on it. But current problem above ground is far less worrying than a problem occurring underground.

There are certainly AIM companies that repeatedly raise capital on promises of multiple drills and then don’t do them, while continuing to pay large salaries. MSMN would be a good example. But that hasn’t been the case with HE1, who seem very focused on delivery, Which bit of the drilling do you think they are not going through with? Everything seems to be going to plan other than the minor mechanical delay.

What surprises me is the idea on some of these boards that NHE and HE1 are on some kind of equal footing, when HE1 has the upper hand and is further ahead, with no constraint on rig timing. I appreciate both would need to raise again on back of a discovery to commercialise but HE1 can go straight to appraisal stage on this well without re-drilling (having completed their exploration drill previously). NHE are drilling their first shot exploration well, hoping for a quick ‘discovery’ of any kind at shallow depth to de-risk future drilling (Minchin style). We can assume that HE1 believe they already made a deeper discovery at Tai (unconfirmed) on the first drill. They need about 3-5 days more drilling, plus estimated two weeks for testing to be sure of it. Fingers crossed.

I’m sure NHE know what they’re aiming for, and they have good data, but targeting the shallow layers of the Rukwa system does still feel risky to me, after HE1’s experience of encountering washouts and non-commercial brine deposits in those layers. Presumably they are following a similar play to Minchin, and gambling on proof of ‘discovery’ at any level to de risk their prospect and raise funds to drill bigger and deeper. I still think HE1 are on the right lines, sinking a full scale well into the deeper targets below the trap. They already have evidence from the narrow exploration well and going straight for an appraisal and production standard well this time. There’s still significant risk but it’s a very confident move.

Subtext, all part of the strategy to change HE1 top to bottom from a mining approach to an oil and gas approach.

Https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/helium_one/news/rns/story/w3jg2dx

Can someone explain to me what they think the ‘problem with comms’ is? I’m baffled, as the comms seems to be very professional this campaign, daily Tweets, periodic RNS as and when needed by the market, supplemented by shareholder presentations and interviews. I think it’s really good.

The purpose of the raise was to jump on the opportunity to complete two back to back drills, enabling them to have a shot at Itumbula while the rig, crew and services were mobilised to Rukwa.

Reads like a malicious short report. Why would anyone take any notice of that kind of writing?

“Unsurprisingly, investors have lost trust in HE1 management, who misled regarding the need for a placing before the drill and whose current PR seems to be more about their own virtue signalling than delivering shareholder friendly announcements. Hence the overreaction and a current share price which effectively already assumes failure of the first drill.”

Why?

“ i have emailed the top brass np at he fca for answers and investigations to the extreme level once and for all !!”

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Absolute nonsense, the company comms have been very clear, consistent and professional ever since LB took over as CEO. You have unrealistic expectations.

Yes, but simply reading off the geological probability of success as a single statistical figure is misleading, as it’s rather conservatively a product of the chances of all five contributory factors factored independently of one another (some of which we can be reasonably confident about).

I agree with you on the market risks but not the geology

But the CPR dates from before the AIM admission, before they drilled Tai 1, proving the existence of a multi layered working helium system, and before the stage 2 seismic studies. That’s like ignoring the whole of the geological evidence of the past two years. I agree that a skeptical view is always needed with drill projects (as we’ve just seen) but to be honest the geology is the main factor in their favour.

If you think it’s a ‘wildcat’ drill you’ve misunderstood the project.

You are confusing helium shows with discovery. They are not the same thing. There is near zero chance of no helium shows, we already know the helium is there at multiple levels. What matters is the concentrations, and whether gas can be free flowed from a trap/reservoir to the well. We already drilled the exploration well before at Tai1, this is designed to be an appraisal and production well. It is not a ‘duster’ play, it’s a stage beyond that.